/m/royals

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

My first instinct was to be amused at the idea that losing 2013 Miguel Tejada created a hole to be filled but damned if he hasn't been the only worthwhile middle infielder offensively on the Royals this year.

but the Royals are only 4.5 games out of the WC spot and 7 back of the AL Central division at 61-54

It's a good thing they let Jeff Francoeur "accumulate" -.9 WAR before releasing him. As atrocious as the aforementioned middle infielders have been at least defense puts them all slightly in the positive.

At least the Nats GM didn't sell out the teams future in a last ditch effort to save his job.

I didn't like the Wil Myers trade any more than you did, but there's a case to be made that waiting until next year is selling out the team's future more so than trading for Shields.

Eric Hosmer is controlled through 2017.
Mike Moustakas is controlled through 2017.
Salvador Perez is controlled through 2019.
Alex Gordon is controlled through 2016.
Billy Butler is controlled through 2015.
Lorenzo Cain is controlled through 2017.
Danny Duffy is controlled through 2017.

Come about 2016, this team is going to need another wave of talent or else a significantly expanded payroll. That gives you about a four year window in which you're competitive with a nucleus of cheap talent, with the closest pitchers in the minors probably arriving late this year or early next year. Waiting until 2014 is throwing away a quarter of your window.

Indeed, selling out the team's future by trading "a player to be named later or cash considerations" to fill a gap created by an injury is truly the mark of a desperate man.

Given the price they paid for Maxwell, some concern is probably warranted.

As opposed to selling out the team's present by sitting down their best pitcher for the playoffs, as it was obvious 2012 was going to be the first of a long string of post-season appearances.

They wanted to make sure Strasburg didn't hurt his arm, and Strasburg's made 22 starts and counting so far this year, and the Nats actually won the game that Detwiler started in the playoffs in place of Strasburg, but I guess none of that matters, huh?

Wouldn't shock me if KC ends up winning the Maxwell deal, even if I'm surprised that he got HOU Kyle Smith. Like Sickles, I think he might peak late and - unlike the stats but like scouts - I think he offers cost controlled plus d in all three outfield spots with a plus bat against lefties. Worth having around.
(I had wanted to see him settle into a gig as a cf who bats eighth v r and sixth or so v l, to maximize his value)

I love how actually trying to win games brings ridicule. The prospect fetish around here is getting to be a bit much.

Tell me about it.

If people around here had their way every team would be staffed with mediocre minimum wage nobodies and retreads while all of the team's focus would be on getting as many prospects as possible in the minors. A BTF dream team would be a team that wins 75 games but has every single player on the team best the dollars per win margin by a great deal while having 6 guys down on the farm that make Sickels top 100 prospect list. Perennially.

Indeed, selling out the team's future by trading "a player to be named later or cash considerations" to fill a gap created by an injury is truly the mark of a desperate man.

Your words, not mine. I used those same exact words describing the Wil Myers trade though.

Come about 2016, this team is going to need another wave of talent or else a significantly expanded payroll. That gives you about a four year window in which you're competitive with a nucleus of cheap talent, with the closest pitchers in the minors probably arriving late this year or early next year. Waiting until 2014 is throwing away a quarter of your window.

The Shields deal traded a passel of super cheap and super valuable prospects to take on nearly $30M in new payroll over this year and next. The correct answer was keep Wil Meyers, bench Frenchy, and spend that money in the FA pitching market. Then not only do you have a team that's as good or better as this years edition, but that is far better and more payroll flexible in the future.

And I love the idea that it's a problem that Billy Butler, a part-time player, leaving in 2016 is damaging to the team's potential "window" when he will free up $12.5M in payroll doing so. Or that shipping out the team's best prospect in years who is ready to fill a huge hole while being under cheap team control for SIX MORE YEARS is a solution to a looming payroll crunch.

I love how actually trying to win games brings ridicule. The prospect fetish around here is getting to be a bit much.

I love Dayton Moore defenders try to spin what he does into "trying to win games". Trading a RF who was the Minor League Player of the Year and MLB ready, plus a decent starting pitcher prospect to lock down RF for Frenchy, put Wade Davis back into the starting role he's failed at his entire career, and increase payroll nearly $15M a year just to add one solid starter (#22 in value since 2010 by fWAR) on a short term deal is "trying to win games"?

If people around here had their way every team would be staffed with mediocre minimum wage nobodies and retreads while all of the team's focus would be on getting as many prospects as possible in the minors. A BTF dream team would be a team that wins 75 games but has every single player on the team best the dollars per win margin by a great deal while having 6 guys down on the farm that make Sickels top 100 prospect list. Perennially.

I understand you have to trot out your favorite trope whenever given the opportunity, but what does that have to do with what Dayton Moore did here?

Yea, that extra $18M Dayton spent really helped the team's "winning" this year. Frenchy was one of the worst position players in baseball last year, it was a huge hole on the KC team that had a super cheap and super valuable RF replacement ready, but Moore traded him. That probably cost the team over 3 wins this year, given that Myers could have started in RF from spring training for KC, instead of being kept in the minors the first few months, and Frenchy could have been spotted in from the bench in situations where he might have actually created positive value.

Shields has been very good, but he can't nearly make up for those lost wins, especially when he has to make up for the wins Wade Davis has lost the team, and when combined they cost $12M this year and significantly more next year.

The fact that KC is over .500 now isn't evidence that Dayton Moore's moves were right, it's proof they were wrong, that this team was a lot closer than he could understand (given his absolutely inability to measure players contributions in any accurate or meaningful way), and that they are winning despite his biggest trade being a short term setback and a future crippler.

I love how actually trying to win games brings ridicule. The prospect fetish around here is getting to be a bit much.

I'm not ridiculing Moore because he's trying to "win games". I'm ridiculing Moore because he's so clownishly terrible at it. He's had seven years and complete control over this franchise, and the absolute best he's been able to manage is third place in the AL Central.

If people around here had their way every team would be staffed with mediocre minimum wage nobodies and retreads...

Well, thank God the Royals' fans were saved from a season where they'd need to watch minimum wage nobodies and retreads like Chris Getz and Jeff Francoeur in the everyday lineup. I guess Moore showed us!

Well, thank God the Royals' fans were saved from a season where they'd need to watch minimum wage nobodies and retreads like Chris Getz and Jeff Francoeur in the everyday lineup. I guess Moore showed us!

Presented, by proximity, as if correlated which, of course, they are not. The magic of 160 lives on.

While this statement is strictly correct, I do recall a large number of Nelson Muntz-like commentary when Strasburg missed time at the beginning of June. Therefore, I think Vlad deserves some slack in his pointing out that the failure of the Nats to win the World Series last year (as I get the impression seems "likely" in the minds of some folks) was NOT due to shutting down Strasburg, and while we cannot prove the negative, he hasn't re-broken-down yet, so nothing seems really wrong (from a physiological perspective) with how he was handled by Rizzo et al.

Obviously, we won't have a good sense about the strategy (from a HEALTH perspective) until about about 3-5 years from now, when we can see how healthy the various Nats post-TJ-surgery pitchers are doing relative to other TJ-surgery pitchers from the same period (and, of course, preferably from the same surgeon(s)).

We won't have a good sense about the strategy then either. Five years from now there will be absolutely no evidence to support the notion that keeping young pitchers on strict pitch and innings limits reduces their injury rate, same as now, because it almost certainly isn't true.

And I love the idea that it's a problem that Billy Butler, a part-time player, leaving in 2016 is damaging to the team's potential "window" when he will free up $12.5M in payroll doing so. Or that shipping out the team's best prospect in years who is ready to fill a huge hole while being under cheap team control for SIX MORE YEARS is a solution to a looming payroll crunch.

Billy Butler has started 159, 158, 159, and 161 games the last four years, plus 115 so far this year. If he leaves, gets old, catches the injury bug, or develops a tragic addiction to Baconators, his production will have to be replaced. At just about the same time that several other key contributors' production will also have to be replaced.

Again, I don't disagree with you about the Myers trade. I think they gave up too much. But what they got back was not nothing, and it was defensible even from a sabermetric viewpoint. Going into this year with gaping holes at two rotation spots torpedoes the season before it starts, wasting SEVEN CHEAP YEARS in the process.

In addition to the contract I referred to earlier, I should probably add Greg Holland (2016), Kelvin Herrera (2017), Aaron Crow (2016), and Tim Collins (2016).

If people around here had their way every team would be staffed with mediocre minimum wage nobodies and retreads while all of the team's focus would be on getting as many prospects as possible in the minors. A BTF dream team would be a team that wins 75 games but has every single player on the team best the dollars per win margin by a great deal while having 6 guys down on the farm that make Sickels top 100 prospect list. Perennially.

Dayton Moore cannot evaluate major league talent, and the organization he has created cannot develop talent. He has an eye for minor league talent, but has shown no ability to evaluate the value of that talent compared to the talent of major league players. Essentially, he's a slightly more successful Chuck Lamar (maybe, Lamar did run an expansion team).

W-L
Lamar - 518-777
Moore - 419-553 (Does not include first half season and this season)

Shocking that a hyperbole meant to show the extremes isn't exactly what everybody thinks here.

Trade after trade, signing after signing, transaction after transaction numerous people on BTF come out of the woodwork to proclaim X thing is good or bad based on whether or not it was a good deal based on dollars per win. Numerous people will come out of the woodwork to declaim a trade because team Y is giving up prospect X because prospect X got a good mention by BA and thus prospect X is going to be the next Mickey Mantle.

A lot of people think they are focused on wins and winning but what they really are focused on is being the smartest guy in the room and they think they do that by finding great deals based on dollars per win and uncovering the next Mickey Mantle disguised as Mark Teahan.

Billy Butler has started 159, 158, 159, and 161 games the last four years, plus 115 so far this year. If he leaves, gets old, catches the injury bug, or develops a tragic addiction to Baconators, his production will have to be replaced. At just about the same time that several other key contributors' production will also have to be replaced.

He "starts" nearly every game on the bench without a glove. He's a DH, a good one, but no big Papi. For $12.5M, the team should be able to find a decent but lesser DH for far less (or just rotate best hitting starters through it as rest days) and use the savings to help fill a far more important hole (staff).

Again, I don't disagree with you about the Myers trade. I think they gave up too much. But what they got back was not nothing, and it was defensible even from a sabermetric viewpoint. Going into this year with gaping holes at two rotation spots torpedoes the season before it starts, wasting SEVEN CHEAP YEARS in the process.

Just stop it, you aren't even close.

It might be "defensible" if they spent $12M in the free agency market to add what looks to be a net 2 WAR by seasons end. Defensible mind you, not cheap, or good, and arguably meh. But they gave up far more on top of the $12M in talent, probably $50M+ worth, and owe another $14M in salary next year.

And they didn't fill two rotation holes with this trade, they filled one. Odorrizzi is likely as good as Davis, has more upside, is far cheaper and with 7 years of control. If their age/salaries/control were identical, trading Myers directly for Shields would have been a decent idea. They would have left the gaping bloody in RF to fix the gaping bloody hole at the front of the rotation, but there is more value in stabilizing the rotation.

But instead they
- Added $26M in additional salary obligations over 2 years.
- Gave up Myers 7 super cheap and valuable control years.
- Downgraded the others pitcher spot by giving up Odorrizzi for Davis, a failed version of Jake. In the unlikely event Davis figures out how to be a decent MLB starter, he's still owed $31M over the next 4 years, in the more likely event Jake does he's nearly free during that span. As Davis busts, KC still owes him $5M next year. If Jake busts, he's owed nothing.
- Gave up additional prospects of some value.

They did get 1 year of Johnson which has been useful. But they would have been far ahead both this year, and next year and during their "window", if they kept Myers, Odorrizzi, the other prospects (or trade them/one straight up for Johnson) and filled that hole in their starting rotation from free agency. Anibal Sanches is only making $27M this year and next, no rational person would prefer Shields + Davis to Sanchez + Odirrizzi + Myers. If KC had signed Sanchez by offering another year ($96M/6 years) it is likely they would not get full value out of the last year or two of the deal but would have actually created a "window" for this team as they don't have one now.

This year they are 7.5 games back for the division, but behind 2 teams, not one. The odds of catching Detroit are slim, it requires the Tigers cratering AND beating Cleveland to the finish. They are 12.5 games behind the wildcard, and have to leapfrog 3 teams, virtually impossible.

They have no "window" the next few years because their rotation looks to be pretty poor going forward. Shields is good, but Santana is having a fluke year. He's had 2 seasons with a FIP under 4.00, this year (3.77), and 2008. He can be a decent starter (career ERA+ 99 but good innings eater) but is a free agent coming off a near career year, he'll now be pricey. Guthrie is mediocre, aging, and they owe him $10M/year for the next two years. Mendoza is wow bad. A rotation built around a #1 with a career ERA+ of 108 and 3 pitchers with expected sub 100 ERA+ (Career: Santana 99, Guthrie 102, but 97 since 2009, Davis 93, Mendoza 79) isn't going to be a strength, its not going to put up the solid 3.94 ERA this years staff fluked into. And even if it did, you can't count on the relievers throwing an incredible sub 3.00 ERA like they did this year either.

So now Moore has to get really creative in order to create a "window" for this group. Given what he's already surrendered too much from the farm, he has to take on salary to get at least one more starter, either through free agency or taking on another teams overpaid but still decent starter. If he could afford to that, why did he not sign a free agent starter last year so he could keep Myers and at least also have a much better offensive team at the same payroll? Upgrading the offense with a 130 OPS+ right fielder makes the team much more competitive with a mediocre staff.

If Moore couldn't afford to overpay Sanchez or some other available (either FA or overpaid trade bait) starter last off-season he couldn't afford to do that trade.

If he could afford a free agent (and he could) it makes the trade even dumber. He gave up probably $50M in value in that awful, awful trade, and cost KC a chance at a real window for their current core group of players. Instead he or the next GM will likely be trading one every year to manage payroll because of his wasteful misspending of scarce resources.

So, to summarize, your solution is to deny there's a problem. WAR per dollar is the correct metric, this year and going forward. The Royals do not contend this year under your plan, will not contend next year, and the team will start breaking up just as Myers and Odorizzi begin to be reliable contributors. There is no window of contention in either the short or medium term.

It's always a sign you realize you are wrong when you feel competed misstate your opponents position in an argument.

Under my "plan" the Royals might be in first place right now. Myers (in only 44 games) & Sanchez have been 4 wins better than Shields and Frenchy this year already. Signing Sanchez also costs the Tigers nearly 4 wins that would have been impossible to fully replace. And it's unlikely that Odorrizzi would have been as bad as Davis, combine any wins gained there with those gained starting Myers in right field from opening day (Tampa brought him up June 18th after he OPSd .878 in a .720 average AAA league).

And obviously under my "plan" the team is far better able to compete over the next 5 years.
- Sanchez is a better, younger starter than Shields and he would be locked down for the duration of the "window", while Shields is a free agent after next year.
- Wil Myers is already a reliable contributor (OPS+ 146), With his speed, arm and athleticism he should be a better than average defender, meaning even if his bat slumps he can still be a plus contributer..
- Odorrizzi has the potential to give them a solid starter at MLB minimum wage for a few years, while Davis sucks and is gone after next year.
- The team still retains a couple other useful prospects for other deals or who might bloom.

The best way for payroll teams like KC to be able to compete is to find cheap superstars. They simply don't have enough money to spread around to fill all the holes in a roster. Wil Myers was the highest rated prospect they had in a long while, and who fit a team hole so deep that even if a league average Wil Myers would have been a huge upgrade. Even better Wil was beating expectations last year with a monster season that not only won him Minor League Player of the Year, but showed skeptics who had pegged him as just a high average hitter that he was developing substantial power.

With a prospect like that, you can gamble that his improvement is a sign of stardom to come, and keep hold of him to find out what happens. Or you can decide that it was an outlier, a fluke, and cash him in trade while his value is still super high. A team like KC should be inclined to gamble on his improvement being real because the potential payoff is so huge for their teams competitiveness. I'm also inclined to bet on guys who still improve as they face tougher competition, they seem like the best types to make the adjustments to succeed in the MLB.

Moore made the other gamble, and did it in the worst way possible. Even without the corpse of Wade Davis in the deal to drag the team down, Shields himself might only be worth $15M over what they have to pay him. Moore gave up maybe 3-4 times that in prospect value, he didnt cash in his Wil Myers chip anywhere near full value. And now his cash out is turning into a spectacular mistake as Wil Myers looks like a star more and more each day.

That anyone is willing to try to defend the rank stupidity of trading Wil Myers for James Shields (and paying extra for the privilege!) is a testament to the indomitable current of contrarianism that runs through this site. It was rank stupidity and utterly indefensible from any perspective, even the "OK yeah it's a bad deal long term but Moore has to make the playoffs in 2013 or he's fired so" perspective.

That trade happened because Moore was so enamored of Jeff ####### Francoeur that he considered Myers blocked.

In fairness - setting aside the Myers trade - I think many people are surprised to find out that the Royals actually are on the fringes of the WC race.... and I think a lot of people go back to the Pirates silliness of actually acquiring a washed up Matt Morris when it was clear they weren't going to even sniff the playoffs.

Purely in terms of this trade, there's nothing wrong with it... The Royals - sad as it is - could actually use what Carroll offers and the PTBNL isn't likely to be anything we'll ever hear from again (carroll is 39, and actually has a decent sized contract).

I think you can quibble more with the Maxwell trade -- Kyle Smith is probably too big a price to pay for him... That's not to say that trading Smith or any other proispect specifically is a mistake... just that the return should have been more than a 29 yo that's already been claimed/switched teams twice on waivers in his career and is at best the short side of a platoon.

To clarify, my comment was related to this move. I thought it was odd that a sarcastic comment accompanied what I think is a fairly logical trade for the Royals. But I am getting fairly tired of the cult of the prospect around here.

By God, I predicted all this. Not that anyone cares, but a couple of years ago I wrote that it was irrelevant how good Moore was at coming up with minor league talent; he was simply so godawful at judging major leaguers that he'd never be able to fill in around the young guys with enough hitting and pitching to win anything.

Still, the Myers trade exceeded even my most negative expectations. What was it about his .314/.387/.600/.987 season in AA/AAA 2012 that Moore found objectionable? At age 21???

That trade happened because Moore was so enamored of Jeff ####### Francoeur that he considered Myers blocked.

Wow. We knew Moore just didn't have GM chops, but that's like an accountant being unfamiliar with division. On top of that, how can you appear to be a sound judge of minor league talent without being able to tell that Francouer is no kind of ballplayer?

Because the whole name of the game when you're judging amateur and low-minors talent (which is what Moore excels at) is dreaming on players and imagining what they could be when they grow up, if everything breaks right. Moore just kept right on dreaming on Jeff Francouer. Works so hard... brings so much energy... loves the game... has the Good Face... great athlete... just a tweak in the swing here, adjustment there and he'll be hitting .320 with power... Moore fell in love with Francoeur back in Atlanta, and I honestly believe he never gave up on his dreams on Francoeur right up to the bitter end.

It honestly would not surprise me to learn Moore cried the day he had to fax in the paperwork informing the league office Francouer was being designated for assignment.

If KC had signed Sanchez by offering another year ($96M/6 years) it is likely they would not get full value out of the last year or two of the deal but would have actually created a "window" for this team as they don't have one now.

You keep going on and on about Sanchez, as if the Royals could have signed him and only him, and were idiots not to. Had they gone the free agent route, they could have easily signed Edwin Jackson instead. Looking at the one free agent success and saying "They should have signed him instead of making a trade" is the height of Monday morning quarterbacking.

#30-32 ... There's no way that's true. If it was, I don't think he would have released Francoeur mid-season after a slump. More likely, he just thought that Myers was a reasonable price for Shields.

In the original thread on the trade I was one of the people that was *almost* defending Moore. Not that it was a good trade, just that the general idea behind the trade was not wrong - that as far as the "success cyle" was concerned, the Royals were in a fine place to try and add a veteran starter. And as the team has its highest win percentage in two decades, I feel good about that argument.

As far as the success cycle was concerned the gap between the expected 2013 production of Wil Myers and Jeff Francoeur was easily larger than the gap between that of James Shields and J. Random Replacement Level Starter. The trade made the 2013 Royals worse, it was obvious at the time it made the 2013 Royals worse, and the fact they're over .500 now despite the trade making the team worse certainly doesn't change that fact.

That's before we consider the impact on the 2015 Royals. Or the extras the Royals threw into the trade.

So I will stand by my assertion that Moore's love affair with Jeff Francoeur and subsequent regarding of Wil Myers as a spare part was a major motivator for the trade. Where any rational person saw a sucking wound in right field, Moore saw a solid major league regular.

The fatal error of (presumably) Moore and those supporting him is thinking of Myers as a prospect. He was a major league player with an expected level of performance not much less certain than that of any established player.

Edit: For clarity I am speculating that Moore's thought process, summarized, was "I need a starting pitcher --> I have a valuable outfield prospect with no lineup spot for 2013 --> Who's the best starting pitcher I can trade him for? --> (Couple weeks calling around to find out) --> James Shields."

The fatal error of (presumably) Moore and those supporting him is thinking of Myers as a prospect. He was a major league player with an expected level of performance not much less certain than that of any established player.

Edit: For clarity I am speculating that Moore's thought process, summarized, was "I need a starting pitcher --> I have a valuable outfield prospect with no lineup spot for 2013 --> Who's the best starting pitcher I can trade him for? --> (Couple weeks calling around to find out) --> James Shields."

- Sanchez is a better, younger starter than Shields and he would be locked down for the duration of the "window", while Shields is a free agent after next year.

You knew Sanchez was a better starter than Shields this winter? Based on what?

Sanchez was an above average pitcher until the post season last year, and signed with Detroit for 5 years, $88 million. He wasn't going to KC for 6/96. Maybe six years, $105 million? Probably more. Quite a bargain there, eh?

And who is your #2 starter? Odorizzi? Hochevar? Chen? Mendoza? Or would you have signed all the free agent pitchers who are having good years like Liriano, traded for Santana, and wisely let the Danny Harens sign elsewhere?

Shields himself might only be worth $15M over what they have to pay him. Moore gave up maybe 3-4 times that in prospect value, he didnt cash in his Wil Myers chip anywhere near full value. And now his cash out is turning into a spectacular mistake as Wil Myers looks like a star more and more each day.

You would make more sense if you didn't propose spending all the Wil Myers money saved (and more) on a 5-6 year contract for a starting pitcher like Anibal Sanchez.

That anyone is willing to try to defend the rank stupidity of trading Wil Myers for James Shields (and paying extra for the privilege!) is a testament to the indomitable current of contrarianism that runs through this site.

You keep going on and on about Sanchez, as if the Royals could have signed him and only him, and were idiots not to. Had they gone the free agent route, they could have easily signed Edwin Jackson instead. Looking at the one free agent success and saying "They should have signed him instead of making a trade" is the height of Monday morning quarterbacking.

I picked Sanchez randomly the day after the Wil Meyers trade on this very site as an example of a starter they could have afforded in free agency for roughly the same payroll cost as Shield/Davis. What if KC had signed Jackson instead? On bWAR, it would have lost them 3 Wins so far year, which they would have gotten right back having Wil Meyers in right field. So a wash mostly this year, but what about next year?

Edwin Jackson has a career 96 ERA+, Shields 108. So they lose what, an extra game a year based on that difference, while winning how many more games having Wil Meyers and Jake Oddorizzi under cheap control for years to come plus whatever value they get out of the other prospects.

Even signing Edwin Jackson and enduring the shitty year he's having would have won as many games this year and created a better future for this team than that terrible trade.

You knew Sanchez was a better starter than Shields this winter? Based on what?

I wouldn't claim a huge difference in expected performance, but I would have strongly preferred Anibal based on age & 600 fewer MLB innings on his arm.

Sanchez was an above average pitcher until the post season last year, and signed with Detroit for 5 years, $88 million. He wasn't going to KC for 6/96. Maybe six years, $105 million? Probably more. Quite a bargain there, eh?

6/$96M is another $16M guaranteed, a substantial bump.. Even if you think Anibal would require $100M, yea it's a bargain if it saves giving away $50M+ in prospect value. Also not only does Sanchez fill a big hole for KC, signing him creates a big one for Detroit.

And if you don't like Sanchez, why not Kuroda? Even Petitte, Dempster, or Lohse while not as good as Shields would have been good bets to improve the rotation without surrendering anything of value, one of them in combination with keeping Myers would have added wins over the Shields trade both this year and in the future.

And who is your #2 starter? Odorizzi? Hochevar? Chen? Mendoza? Or would you have signed all the free agent pitchers who are having good years like Liriano, traded for Santana, and wisely let the Danny Harens sign elsewhere?

Santana is the #2, at least this year. I'm not criticizing that pickup, it was a nice gamble by Moore. But it has little to no future since Santana is pitching over his head, and his market price will likely exceed his value this offseason while the team has no options on him.

Odorizzi's AAA numbers aren't outstanding, 8.8 K/9, 3.2 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9, but slightly better than what Wade Davis did for the same AAA team a few years ago. The difference of course is that Wade is 27, Jake is 23, Davis costs $8M over this year and next, Jake would cost $1M. Yea, I'd like to give Jake a shot in the rotation instead of Wade.

Dayton Moore took over in June, 2006. The team's staff was terrible, but fortunately for Dayton there was a kid named Greinke already on the team. The sole strides the staff made towards respectability under Dayton Moore was solely due to Greinke. In 2009 the Royals staff put up a 95 ERA+ in 1,400 innings while Zack contributed 229 innings of 205 ERA+. That means that 22 pitchers Dayton Moore had on his staff 3 years into his tenure combined for 1,200 innings of 5.3 ERA in one season.

A bad starting staff can't be fixed overnight. That's what Moore tried to do with this panic trade after failing for 6 years. A GM can only make the best possible decisions with the resources and opportunities he's given. You can't mate a pig and a cow expecting a bacon burger. If there aren't good starters available at a reasonable cost, and you can get more wins spending the same money improving your defense and offense, then that's what you have to do. You bide your time, build your farm system, work for opportunities to get better starting pitching. But you don't panic and give away super valuable assets for a good, but not great, starting pitcher just so you can pay him 75% of his market value for 2 seasons.

With a prospect like that, you can gamble that his improvement is a sign of stardom to come, and keep hold of him to find out what happens. Or you can decide that it was an outlier, a fluke, and cash him in trade while his value is still super high. A team like KC should be inclined to gamble on his improvement being real because the potential payoff is so huge for their teams competitiveness. I'm also inclined to bet on guys who still improve as they face tougher competition, they seem like the best types to make the adjustments to succeed in the MLB.

in the time that dayton moore has been the GM of the royals, he's had 4 top 10 hitting prospects and all of them (billy butler, alex gordon, eric hosmer, mike moustakas) stagnated once they got to the majors. it would not surprise me at all if those failures, combined with moore's outsized love of francouer and multiplied by the pressure he felt he was under to make the playoffs to keep his job directly fed into his willingness to trade wil myers.

I was only using full seasons. His first half season was terrible and would almost completely off-set this season. Right now, 2013 is Moore's best season, but there's still a month to play, and I'm far from convinced the Royals are going to finish the year over .500. They look like last years Pirates in a lot of ways, but without a long term plan.

BTW, the paralell's between Lamar and Moore are more than win loss records. Both had roots in the Braves organization. Both were well regarded talents. Both took over teams that were in bad shape. Both have made expensive moves for big names. Lamar had 0 success, Moore hasn't had much better. Maybe he sneaks into the playoffs this year, but I doubt it.

6/$96M is another $16M guaranteed, a substantial bump.. Even if you think Anibal would require $100M, yea it's a bargain if it saves giving away $50M+ in prospect value. Also not only does Sanchez fill a big hole for KC, signing him creates a big one for Detroit.

A five or six year contract for someone like Anibal Sanchez is not a bargain. You keep ignoring the risk of signing a pitcher to a huge contract of that length. Just like you keep ignoring the high cost of any live, breathing starting pitcher this past off-season.

And if you don't like Sanchez, why not Kuroda? Even Petitte, Dempster, or Lohse while not as good as Shields would have been good bets to improve the rotation without surrendering anything of value, one of them in combination with keeping Myers would have added wins over the Shields trade both this year and in the future

1) Pettitte wasn't going to sign with the Royals, it's silly to even mention the possibility.
2) Kuroda and Lohse would have cost the Royals their supplemental draft pick...you think that would be a good idea for a small-market team?
3) Dempster, in addition to being a mediocre pitcher switching leagues, wanted a three year contract and rejected a two year offer from the Royals for $26 million.
4) Shaun Marcum was mentioned as a possibility; that wouldn't have turned out well.
5) Jackson, 4 years, $52 million.
6) Peavy, 2 years, $29 million. And on it goes.
7) Greinke, 6 years, $147 million.

Who else out there was worth a scat and $15 million per? No starting pitcher was going to sign with a 72 win team without that 72 win team blowing all other offers out of the water.

It's fine and dandy to think the Royals should have bought starting pitching elsewhere and kept Myers, but the theory doesn't really match up with the facts on the ground.

A bad starting staff can't be fixed overnight. That's what Moore tried to do with this panic trade after failing for 6 years.

What are you talking about? The Royals did fix a bad starting staff overnight. Four new starters in the rotation, and a 72 win team is now on pace to win 88 games with a league average right fielder taking the place of Wil Myers. I know it's cute to talk about the Frenchy Fetish, but Frenchy lost his full-time role while Wil Myers was still patrolling right field for the Durham Bulls. Had the trade not been made, the Royals likely would have gamed Myers's super-two status just like the Rays did.

And please stop with the Dayton Moore history lessons. We all know what he's done the last six years.

in the time that dayton moore has been the GM of the royals, he's had 4 top 10 hitting prospects and all of them (billy butler, alex gordon, eric hosmer, mike moustakas) stagnated once they got to the majors. it would not surprise me at all if those failures, combined with moore's outsized love of francouer and multiplied by the pressure he felt he was under to make the playoffs to keep his job directly fed into his willingness to trade wil myers.

And of course, trading Eric Hosmer, or Mike Moustakas, for James Shields, a couple years ago, would have also been a horrible trade because they could have just signed John Lackey or any other can't-miss ace WITHOUT giving up this can't-miss superstud hitting prospect.